Legal Opinion

People v. Rice

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 28, 1894PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Exceptions before judgment from Hillsdale. (Lane, J.) Respondents were convicted of a violation of the local •option law. The facts are stated in the opinions.

1Opinion of the Court

McGrath, 0. J.

Respondents were charged with the violation of the local option law, and were convicted.

It is insisted that the information alleged two distinct *352offenses, viz., that of keeping a place where liquors were sold, and that of selling on a specified day. No objection was raised until the case was about to be submitted to the jury, when the people were required to elect, and did elect.1 The objection is therefore without force.

One Alley testified that he went into defendants’ place with one Adams, and—

“I drank what I called flager beer.’ * * * What I drank I thought was beer. * * * I…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ChurchillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
  2. People v. MurphyMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  3. State v. MainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1863
  4. State v. BugbeeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1849
  5. Stevens v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1873

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. People v. KarcherMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
  2. State v. PistonaWashington Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Thompson v. CainMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Rowe v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1985
  5. People v. BarnesMichigan Supreme Court · 1897

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API